Euro politics costs NATO detainee intelligence

David Bosco:

...

So NATO countries have essentially opted out of the detainee business. Before committing their troops to combat areas, the Canadian, Dutch and British governments signed agreements with the Afghan government stating that any captured fighters would be handed over to Afghan authorities rather than to American forces.

In practice, these agreements mean that NATO troops have no system in place for regularly interrogating Taliban fighters for intelligence purposes. Whenever possible, they let the Afghan troops they operate with take custody. When that's not possible, they house their prisoners briefly in makeshift facilities while they arrange a transfer to the Afghans. NATO guidelines call for the handover of prisoners within 96 hours, far too brief a time for soldiers to even know whom they're holding. And once prisoners are in Afghan hands, international forces easily lose track of them.

It's not good policy. Not only is NATO forfeiting the intelligence benefits that can come with real-time interrogation, it's sending detainees into an Afghan prison system poorly equipped to handle them and rife with abuse.

...

Shuffling detainees off to the Afghans may make it easier for European politicians to sleep at night, but it is an operational and ethical evasion. A better solution is to establish a modern detention center run by the Afghan government but closely monitored by NATO soldiers and intelligence officers, including Americans.

...

While the author complains about the US's "strained interpretations" of the Geneva Conventions, the problem is that the Euros have not bothered to read or enforce the Geneva Conventions and the media has ignored the enemy violations of the Conventions and the lessening of rights that flow from that failure. How many stories mention the enemy's failure to follow the terms of the Conventions? What the Euro critics are suggesting is that there should be no consequences to an enemy who fails to follow the Conventions. They are turning them into a unilateral contract that only the west is required to follow.